Foreign Law, Democracy, and Constitutional Interpretation: A German-American Comparison

Shu-Perng Hwang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2019.80

2019-12-01

German Law Journal

Abstract:Abstract Democracy is usually relied upon as an important argument against the excessive influence of international and foreign law on the domestic legal order, and especially on domestic constitutional law. Both in Germany and the United States, skeptics and opponents of the Europeanization or internationalization of domestic constitutional law repeatedly raise democratic concerns. From a comparative perspective, this Article examines the German and American democratic arguments against an overreliance on international and foreign law in constitutional interpretations. In exploring the democratic concerns expressed in German and American discussions, this Article focuses especially on the contrast between German dualism on the one hand and American exceptionalism on the other hand. This Article shows that, while the German dualists and the American exceptionalists base their arguments on different understandings of democracy, they share the viewpoint that democracy can only be realized on the national level, whereas international law aims at uniformity und thus inevitably runs counter to democratic self-governance and self-determination of the states. Precisely in this sense, it can be said that there is no qualitative, but rather only a quantitative distinction between German and American democratic arguments. Thus conceived, the alleged contrast between the principle of open statehood emphasized by German constitutional law scholars and the Constitutional Court and the idea of American exceptionalism embraced by a number of critics of the use of foreign law lies only in the extent to which the reference to international or foreign law in interpreting the domestic Constitution is deemed legitimate and justifiable.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The main problem that this paper attempts to solve is how to uphold the democratic principle in the context of the increasing influence of international law and foreign laws on the domestic legal order, especially constitutional interpretation, in the era of globalization. Specifically, by comparing the discussions in Germany and the United States in this regard, the paper explores the different democratic views of the two countries regarding the role of international law and foreign laws in constitutional interpretation. The paper points out that although scholars in both Germany and the United States emphasize the democratic importance of the domestic constitutional order, they have differences in understanding democracy, and these differences affect their attitudes towards the relationship between international law and the domestic constitution.

### Core Issues of the Paper
1. **The Relationship between the Democratic Principle, International Law, and Foreign Laws**:
- **The German Perspective**: German scholars generally believe that national sovereignty and democracy are inseparable. Therefore, international law and EU law cannot replace or automatically permeate into the domestic legal system. The German Constitutional Court adheres to the supremacy of the Basic Law, believing that only the Basic Law can reflect the people's sovereignty and democratic will.
- **The American Perspective**: American scholars emphasize the uniqueness of American democracy, believing that the US Constitution can only reflect the democratic will of the American people and should not be influenced by foreign sources.

2. **The Interaction between International Law and the Domestic Constitution**:
- **German Dualism**: German scholars adhere to the dualist view between international law and domestic law, believing that international law and domestic law belong to different legal fields, and domestic law should maintain its independence and supremacy.
- **American Exceptionalism**: American scholars emphasize the particularity of the United States, believing that the US Constitution has a unique position and should not be interfered with by foreign laws.

3. **The Application of International Law under Democratic Constraints**:
- **Germany**: The German Constitutional Court believes that even if the priority applicability of EU law is recognized, this priority is only limited to the application level, not the effectiveness level. The core content of the Basic Law is not violated by EU law.
- **A merica**: American scholars advocate that the Supreme Court should not refer to any foreign sources when interpreting the Constitution to ensure the purity and democracy of the Constitution.

### Paper Structure
- **Introduction**: Introduce that in the context of globalization, the democratic principle is often used to oppose the excessive influence of international law and foreign laws on the domestic legal order.
- **German Democratic Concerns**: Analyze how the mainstream views in Germany emphasize the inseparability of national sovereignty and democracy, as well as the supremacy of the Basic Law.
- **American Democratic Concerns**: Explore how American scholars emphasize the uniqueness of American democracy and their resistance to foreign laws.
- **Comparative Analysis**: Compare the democratic views of Germany and the United States, and point out the differences in understanding and attitude between the two.
- **Conclusion**: Summarize the commonalities and differences between the two countries in upholding the democratic principle, and propose directions for future research.

Through these analyses, the paper aims to reveal the different democratic logics of Germany and the United States in dealing with the relationship between international law and the domestic constitution, and explore the deep - seated reasons behind these logics.